Joe Andrew's (SD from Indiana) switch from Clinton to Obama is a very BIG DEAL

[cali]

Here's Why: Joe Andrew was one of the very first SDs to jump on the Clinton train. He endorsed her the same day she formally announced her run for the Presidency. Andrew was appointed as DNC chair by President Clinton. He obviously has strong ties to the Clintons. Although he's from Indiana, I can't imagine his switch will have any impact on voters there. It's the impact on other SDs that I think could be so potent. Andrew has written a long letter to other SDs documenting why he's switching. In it he says:

"a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue this process, and a vote to continue this process is a vote that assists (Republican) John McCain."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080501/ap_on_el_pr/superdelegates

It doesn't take much reading between the lines to see that Andrew thinks that Obama will be the nominee. In addition, this switch seems to be a pointed rebuke to Clinton. The timing couldn't be worse for her and the wording of his Obama endorsement lauds Obama for his principled stand on the gas tax holiday and how he handled the Wright matter on Tuesday. It's implied that he doesn't think Hillary has taken a principled position- and not just on the gas tax holiday.

My guess is that this is sending shock waves through Camp Clinton, particularly in Indiana. To have a prominent ally defect on the eve of the primary there and to have him do it very publically in an obvious move to influence other SDs is not good news for her. This race is now about getting SDs. Obama is doing far better than Clinton is this most critical area. Andrew's switch can only help him and hurt her. And odds are, It will get a lot of media play in Indiana. Losing a delegate this way, is far worse than your opponent picking up an uncommitted SD. It shows that the person defecting has a lack of faith in the candidate they're abandoning and that candidate's campaign and chances.

That's why this is a BIG DEAL.

[my3boyz]

1. I agree with you

I hope other SD's come out for Obama today.

[livingmadness]

2. It really is Cali. Its huge.

I've heard it on every AP news report for the last 3 hours. It is the beginning of the end for Hillary IMO.

[cali]

5. Fantastic that you're hearing it on news reports

I think it's going to be the talk of D.C. today.

[dempartisan23]

12. obama needs to say this

run commercials quoting rush fatbag supporting hillary clinton.

[Hepburn]

15. If this switch is getting attention from the MSM, then IMO....

...it is not just the Obama supporters on the DU who are thinking this is a rather major event. I bet they are also looking for other SDs to defect from Hillary and undeclared ones to announce for Obama.

[flor de jasmim]

3. News to wake up to! It also highlights another important point:

Hillary started the race with a large number of SDs who endorsed her BEFORE ANY VOTE WAS CAST, so all the talk now about waiting to hear from all the voters is just BS.

[roguevalley]

73. good point, sandi_4_Edwards.

[tekisui]

4. The first of many...

I have been expected a big shift, but I didn't think they would start until Obama got to the PD majority number, or unless he won IN and NC.

I think he is an early snowflake in an avalanche. Like Claire McCaskill said, the SD's are not uncommitted, they are undeclared.

But, the switch is bigger.

[cali]

6. It's always bad news for a campaign when a Super Delegate

switches to the other side. It's particularly bad news when a high profile, long time ally in a state about to hold its primary, switches so publically.

[MindMatter]

77. Clinton has forced the issue

She is partaking in the swift-boating by Scaife and his army. She has created a situation where it is no longer an option for SDs to sit on the sidelines and wait for all the primaries to complete. Clinton really is piling up the damage. It is showing in the polls.

It is not a news flash that going negative and dirty will produce a short-term bump in the numbers. Clinton did it in OH, TX, and PA, and it helped her stay alive -- to the extent that her campaign is alive. But it doesn't change the fact that Obama will be the nominee. The only thing it changes is how damaged he is.

We really don't want him to go negative on her in order to finish her off. That is the wrong way to head into the campaign against McCain. Obama has carved out the high ground, and that will work for him against McCain, who is offering to carry on the regime that is hated by 80% of the public.

[book_worm]

7. I agree with you analysis. It's should impact other SD

especially coming from Bill Clinton's final DNC chair.

[jefferson_dem]

8. “I am convinced that the primary process has devolved to the point that it’s now bad for the Party"

Finally, a statesmen! I salute Mr. Andrews! :patriot:

[cali]

9. It's a really good spot on clear statement

I salute him too. It couldn't have been easy.

[futureliveshere]

10. Bless you cali.. This is a great post to read early in the morning. :)

:woohoo:

[Jersey Devil]

"I can't imagine his switch will have any impact on voters there."

I don't know about that. It is the top headline in the Indy Star this morning:

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage

[cali]

24. That's great. I don't know that endorsements really sway voters

but it surely won't hurt.

[Stephanie]

31. That's excellent, thanks.

HRC gets more Wiley Coyote every day. She's running out of tricks to play on Barack, and every one she tries just backfires on her.

[Renaissance Man]

11. Judas

I'm just waiting for that gem from Carville again to slip out. This is very telling when people who endorsed Senator Clinton before the primaries and caucuses began are now defecting.

[Voltaire]

13. Obama also picked up Congressman Baron Hill this morning

So make that net +3

[Coexist]

16. I missed that - thank you!

[Voltaire]

18. Baron Hill's endorsement helps in the southern end of Indiana

If Obama is going to win, he will need that. And Hill has been around, if him and Andrew are in, they will bring some people with them. Indiana is still going to be tough though.

[Coexist]

21. if we lose by under 4 points in Indiana I will be thrilled!

[democrattotheend]

26. What's your sense there?

How is Obama doing in your neck of the woods? Have you been out canvassing at all? Talked to friends?

[Voltaire]

46. I'm in Indianapolis

And I think he will do well here and in what we call the "Region", which is the Chicagoland area. He should do well in the college towns as well, Bloomington, South Bend, Terre Haute perhaps. I think it will be close, but my gut tells me its Hillary by about 2 - 5 percentage points. In between all those urban areas are a lot of rural and blue collar votes that will be going her way. Folks are working hard here to make me wrong and I hope they do.

By the way, I'll be going to our Jefferson/Jackson Day Dinner this coming Sunday where the guest speakers are Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I'll try to get some good pictures of Obama and Dean. I won't waste disk space on Hillary.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

51. My son is in West Lafayette and his sense is that there are more

Obama supporters than HRC supporters in that area.

[Voltaire]

52. I forgot Purdue

Yes, he should do very well in West Lafayette too!

[Cha]

76. Thanks Voltaire..I'll be looking forward to that

as will tons of people.

[grantcart]

54. +4 Jason Rae 8:30 PDT

http://pageoneq.com/news/2008/Openly_gay_Democratic_superdelegate_Jason_Rae_backs_0501.html

[TheDudeAbides]

62. Superdelegate Hill's vote only cost Obama $12,500 - Bargain!

http://www.capitaleye.org/superdelegates.asp

[Hepburn]

14. I totally agree ~~ this is a BIG deal.

With the ties this SD had to the Clintons and add the reasons he announced when he switched? Huge signal that the other SDs are about to come on board.

Thank gawd...maybe the Hillary nightmare will soon end.

[ErinBerin84]

17. That's very good news!

I just read that Clinton picked up a CT superdelegate as well, a Clinton supporter (if they are reading this) should make a thread about it.

I have been making an effort to lend my congratulations to Clinton supporters here whenever they pick up a superdelegate, but I think that I have yet to see any of them return the favor (I don't really care, but it would be a nice gesture).

[cali]

20. Me too. I almost always do that little formality

and congratulate Clinton and her supporters on any SD endorsements. Like you, I've never seen a Clinton supporter return the favor.

[ErinBerin84]

22. Hmmm, reminds me of someone else.

I love that Obama usually congratulates Clinton on her wins publicly, but when Obama wins, Clinton ignores it (I think she should at least acknowledge and thank her supporters that DID vote for her. Then her camp issues a release like "just for the record, Hillary called Obama to lend her congrats. Haha, ok...)

[TragedyandHope]

19. The signals are coming through LOUD and CLEAR

Hillary, take your fingers out of your ears!

[catgirl]

23. Kicking for Joe!

[Window]

25. Now, that is buyers remorse.

:kick:

[cali]

28. It also indicates strongly that he thinks Obama will be the dem nominee

[Window]

33. Absolutely.

:kick:

[Hope And Change]

27. K & R!

:kick:

[powergirl]

29. Anyone switching FROM Obama TO Clinton?

I never get any Clinton supporters to answer me on this one. :hide:

[cali]

35. No. I don't think a single SD for Obama has switched.

[grantcart]

30. a couple more of these and Hillary will have to withdraw

[Barack_America]

32. A defection of the highest order.

What a stunning development.

Oh man, if the conversation between Hillary and Richardson was "heated", I can't even imagine how this one went down. :scared:

I wonder who got him? I'll put my money on Betsy Meyers.

[grantcart]

55. he said that he didn't bother to call either campaign

that it would smack of the old politics - what do I get for this endorsement.

Said he wouldn't bother to discuss it with either side. It was his opinion.

[Neshanic]

34. Of course it is. Bring that up at the inauguration of McCain.

[cali]

36. ridiculous. I put no stock in silly predictions about who will or won't

win in November. They have all the import of a prediction about who will win the World's Series. Too many variable, too far in the future.

[Neshanic]

38. Republican tactics are not variables. They are tried, true, and get results.

[cali]

39. so 2006 didn't happen. No they don't always work and they're

just as certain to be employed against Hillary as Barack.

[Neshanic]

40. Yes, and Congress is held in such high esteem. Lower numbers than Chimp.

[cali]

43. lol move those goalposts pronto when you lose an argument

we weren't discussing how popular Congress is. We were discussing the FACT that dems won in 2006 and won big despite repuke dirty tricks.

[Neshanic]

45. True, so now you are expecting mass amnesia, and play nice republicans?

[cali]

48. Now you've gone beyond moving goalposts to putting words in my mouth

first of all, I said the repukes would pull shit on whoever the dem candidate is. I couldn't have been clearer. Secondly, approval rates of Congress are a funny thing; it's axiomatic that people hate congress but like their own congress critter. That's why the turnover is so low. And this year, a huge number of repuke congress critters, many from districts they barely won in 2 years ago, have declined to run. Another sign is the dem pick up last month in former Speaker Hasterts' district.

[Voltaire]

47. The Phillies will win the World Series, of COURSE

Phillies in October and Obama in November. Its gonna be a GREAT year.

[BlueIdaho]

37. Good news Cali - the first but certainly not the last. nt.

[Scurrilous]

41. K & R

:thumbsup:

[TheDudeAbides]

42. Joe Andrew received $10k from Obama's PAC

politics as usual...it's a payoff

[cali]

44. That makes no sense whatsoever. Andrew is not an elected politician

He isn't running for office, and PAC money, I believe, is only distributed to elected politicians or those running for office. Provide a link, please- or your post will simply be an empty hit.

[TheDudeAbides]

58. Correction...

Sorry, I got him mixed up with Brad Ellsworth.

Obama has out-bribed Clinton by nearly $500,000 in buying off superdelegates:
http://www.capitaleye.org/superdelegates.asp

I do believe my point about politics as usual stands.

[cali]

63. That completely negates the point you made in this case

and though Obama donated more in the past to elected SDs than Clinton, they both did it.

[TheDudeAbides]

65. Point is: Obama no different...just another politician

Once again, his words don't match his actions.

I'm fine with that, but let's stop pretending otherwise, ok?

[ClassWarrior]

66. That's the meme the RW uses to get away with their crimes.

"They ALLLLLLLL dooo itttt..." Except they don't, and that's the difference between the two parties. Most Dems are Dems because they want to help others. Most Rape-Publicans are Rape-Publicans because they want to help themselves.

NGU.

[cali]

67. I've never said anything but. Of course he's a politician

and I don't have a problem with politician PACs giving money to candidates. I'm very proud of my Senator's PAC.

[TheDudeAbides]

69. Tune has changed

I won't bother pulling together the 100s of posts here at DU
where it is claimed that Obama is above politics as usual.
Buying votes is the *ultimate* in old-school politics.

There's a pattern of words not matching actions.

[cali]

72. MY tune has never changed. And that's my point

you don't seem to be able to deal with that. And I'll add that I don't see politican PACs as buying votes. His PAC hasn't been up and running for some time now, in any case.

[TheDudeAbides]

75. Understand, I'm speaking to others

I've been reading DU for a couple months.
There are many here (other than you) who have been singing that tune.

Personally, I don't think politicians should be able to bribe (support financially) people in such positions of power (superdelegates).

[ekwhite]

93. So you are saying that Democrats shouldn't contribute to fellow Democrat's campaigns?

Certainly, Obama is a politician. That is in his job description as a Senator. Contributing to a Democratic campaign is certainly acceptable, even laudable if you can do it. What I don't understand is why that is a bad thing. Both Clinton and Obama deserve a pat on the back for their contributions.

What Obama has done in his campaign is tried to stay away from the mud-slinging and politics of personal assassination so prevalent in previous campaigns. That is the 'politics as usual' he is trying to stay away from. It seems that you are practicing the politics of innuendo, as if contributing to a congressional campaign is wrong.

[John Q. Citizen]

78. Supporting Dem candidates is bad? You would rather they donate to Repo candidates?

Your argument is ridicules.

I gave money to the Tester campaign and to the Schweitzer campaign here in MT.

If they go for Obama (which I assume they will) are you going to accuse me of paying them to do so?

Look, you may not believe in donating to Dem candidates. And that's fine, it's your money and if you don't really care that much if they win, well then why would you donate.

But to attempt to equate that with bribery is a desperate move.

Please provide a link to where Senator Obama pledged to not give money to Dem candidates.

Otherwise, saying his words don't match his actions is just BS.

Your words are BS. If they aren't, back them up.

[TheDudeAbides]

79. Uhhg...you are so right

Good point; so, actually, there may be MUCH more money flowing through supporters of Obama/Clinton to these delegates
that we don't even know about! Gosh...our system just sucks. I wonder how much money has gone to these SDs from various
George Soros sources (through many levels of indirection)? What do these people expect in return for their support of Obama
and/or Clinton.

Uhhg...our election system sucks...it is run by money...and Obama is very much a part of it.

Obama talks about taking money out of the election process.
I agree with him.
I know he can't do it now because he is not in a position of power yet.

But, his followers should not pretend like he's pure now.
He's just a politician right now.
He may change someday.
Only time will tell.
I have my doubts, but I'd be happy to be proven wrong!

[John Q. Citizen]

87. No one has ever suggested getting money out of politics. How would you put gas

in the car to go vote, or go to a candidate forum?

How would Obama or Hillary get a hotel room on the campaign trail?

There have been suggestions to limit money in politics, particularly the source of money in politics. Their have been suggestions as to how to level the playing field as regards money.

But no one that I no of has ever suggested that we ban money from politics. It would be a rather unworkable policy.

You can attribute anything you want to any candidate you want, but unless you back it up with a source, it seems a bit insincere.

[ekwhite]

94. Dude, I do believe you have just outed yourself

Specifically mentioning George Soros sources as if that is a bad thing. Now what kind of person demonizes George Soros - O'Reilly, Limbaugh, for example? Which party hates George Soros? Starts with an 'R' as I remember.

[TheDudeAbides]

98. nope...life long democratic...straight ticket all my life

money corrupts

[dansolo]

97. He lends support to other politicians

Is that supposed to be viewed as a bad thing? I am more bothered when a politician hoards all of their contributions even when they have an easy race. I like that Obama has worked and contributed to getting other Democrats elected.

[democrattotheend]

68. Obama contributed to candidates when they were running for office

Many of the candidates he helped get elected are now superdelegates. Clinton, by contrast, chose to burn a lot of her money on a Senate race she could have won without spending a dime rather than helping to build the party and take over Congress.

[grantcart]

53. link for your lying ass allegations troll

[Adelante]

57. Back up your statement with a verifying link

And welcome to DU :hi:

[TheDudeAbides]

61. See my post above...and thanks for the welcome!

[pdxmom]

49. Looks like Andrew has put out a pre-emptive strike against the Clinton

campaign's response:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/A_preemptive_strike_from_Andrew.html

"My endorsement of Senator Obama will not be welcome news to my friends and family at the Clinton campaign. If the campaign's surrogates called Governor Bill Richardson, a respected former member of President Clinton's cabinet, a "Judas" for endorsing Senator Obama, we can all imagine how they will treat somebody like me. They are the best practitioners of the old politics, so they will no doubt call me a traitor, an opportunist and a hypocrite. I will be branded as disloyal, power-hungry, but most importantly, they will use the exact words that Republicans used to attack me when I was defending President Clinton.

When they use the same attacks made on me when I was defending them, they prove the callow hypocrisy of the old politics first perfected by Republicans. I am an expert on this because these were the exact tools that I mastered as a campaign volunteer, a campaign manager, a State Party Chair and the National Chair of our Party. I learned the lessons of the tough, right-wing Republicans all too well. I can speak with authority on how to spar with everyone from Lee Atwater to Karl Rove. I understand that, while wrong and pernicious, shallow victory can be achieved through division by semantics and obfuscation. Like many, I succumbed to the addiction of old politics because they are so easy."

[Lucky 13]

80. Now THAT's fascinating.

Joe Andrew knows what's up and it shows.

I hope to GOD other SD's are paying attention.

[redqueen]

81. Wow..

:wow:

[beezlebum]

88. fascinating indeed

[psychopomp]

106. Really doesn't mess around, does he?

He calls those at the Clinton campaign "callow hypocrites."

[not_too_L8]

50. Thanks Cali...K&R

[ampad]

56. K&R

[L0oniX]

59. Welcome ...to all Clinton traitors.

:evilgrin:

[Mme. Defarge]

60. K&R!

[RazBerryBeret]

64. it's the top story on drudge...

I know, but I check out drudge occasionally...
top story with a big pic of Bill looking pissed

[Chrisnreno]

70. 100% agreed. Kick.

[Tribetime]

91. I'll second that K/R

[liberaldem4ever]

71. K & R!

[jenmito]

74. Howard Wolfson just said, in response to this news, that he's not sure Andrew IS from

Indiana, that he just knows he was ORIGINALLY from IN-trying to downplay the whole thing!

[grantcart]

82. It is like it is from some hilarious movie about a campaign filled with drug addicts

He doesn't even sound sober in their response:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRKm5j3pAGU



I think it shows how serious they really believe it is. Losing a super delegate is one thing but they are petrified of an avalanche of SDs who have already changed their minds.

[juno jones]

90. Guess he didn't read the letter.

Andrew talks about writing it from his family's table in IN.

[Coexist]

83. kick

[indimuse]

84. Will you people get a grip?!

DNC, Show Us Clinton’s WMDs *NOW* Or Stuff a Sock In It
Posted on May 1, 2008 by riverdaughter
She’s going to destroy the party! We must act now or it will be curtains for us. John McCain will win in November if we allow Clinton to continue her reckless and dangerous quest for the nomination. The Party is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.

Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!
What’s next? Howard Dean giving a speech at the United Nations with pictures of trailers in the desert filled with voter registration forms for unregistered voters?

Will you people get a grip?!

How can you guys expect us to take you seriously if your superdelegates keep coming up with lame excuses for why they’re switching their votes? It’s completely unbelievable. And there’s no reason to pre-emptively strike Clinton by saying she’s going to say mean things about you. Sticks and stones and all that. Besides, she hasn’t *done* anything to you yet.

It seems to me like the DNC and the party power brokers have decided to unilaterally disarm Clinton without taking the voters into account. They desperately want the anti-Clinton candidate to win. Does the fact that Obama’s campaign cut a deal with the DNC on joint fundraising have anything to do with it? The DNC is headed towards insolvency but instead of settling FL and MI so that it is fair to voters and to Clinton, they’d rather screw the voters in those states and, by extension, every other state that Clinton won. And voters are rightfully withholding their DNC contributions until the problem is solved to their satisfaction. Too bad solving it gets in the way of the party’s beautiful plans to take over the presidency.

Now they are reduced to relying on the Obama campaign to bring in the big bucks and bail them out with the vendors they are beholden to in Denver and all of the downticket candidates who are hurting. And those big donors for Obama, who can now open their pockets with $28,500 donations instead of the paltry $2300 per candidate are demanding quo for their quid. Out trots Andrew to do the dirty work. Now, I wouldn’t call him a traitor, but you know what happened to Colin Powell.

So, produce the evidence, Mr Andrews. Bring forth the nukes and the poisoned gas or stop the stupid fearmongering and STFU.

[smiley_glad_hands]

85. Still harping on MI and Fl? Vote for dems who know how to follow rules already.

So Obama helping out the DNC is a bad thing? What planet are you on? The DNC asked for Hills support too, but she's broke and bitter.

[neverforget]

95. Lame excuses or not, Andrew is now a superdelegate for Obama and not

Hillary. +1 Obama -1 Hillary:)

[ekwhite]

96. That post made absolutely no sense at all

You are asking us to get a grip? :rofl:

[elzenmahn]

99. Take your own advice, indimuse

"It seems to me like the DNC and the party power brokers have decided to unilaterally disarm Clinton without taking the voters into account. They desperately want the anti-Clinton candidate to win."

What a load. Look at all the advantages Clinton had going into the primary season - she had the machine (the DLC and the DNC, et al), she had a HUGE head start in terms of name recognition and connections, she had a front-loaded primary season which was supposed to work to her advantage. Bottom line - if Clinton was such the strong candidate that she was made out to be, then she should have put Obama away on Super Tuesday, and we would not even be having this discussion thread.

This was her race to lose. She did herself in with her hubris, arrogance (for example, her loan of $5 million to her own campaign after Super Tuesday, since she apparently didn't expect Obama to do so well), and her miscalculations. And please don't give me the arguement that "it's her turn" - she's not "entitled" to anything. She needs only to look in the mirror to see the reason why she's losing it.

[D23MIURG23]

102. "Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!"

And you want us to get a grip?

:wtf:

[green917]

103. get a grip?

First of all, quite frankly (and, I only speak for myself here) I don't give a rat's ass if you take us seriously. You talk about our SDs needing to come up with reasons for switching their votes. How many of Senator Obama's pledged Super Delegates have switched to Sen. Clinton again? Maybe Senator Clinton and, by proxy, you need to start worrying more about why she is suddenly losing her lead in the Super Delegate category (the ONLY category she's ever lead in I may add). As far as talking about what Senator Clinton is going to say about him, well, I can't say as I blame him for that fear given the fact that she or one of her surrogates have gone off like a couple of cheap rockets every time someone they think owes Senator or President Clinton something has said or done something that runs counter to her noblesse oblige.

More importantly, "without taking the voters into account"??? Really? Last time I checked, Senator Obama has lead in pledged delegates and the popular vote since, oh, IOWA. The voters have already made their choice. And the whole Michigan/Florida canard is getting tired. Perhaps if Senator Clinton hadn't approved the fact that those delegates weren't going to be seated when she was still the presumptive nominee, that argument that those delegates from states where Senator Obama (abiding by the rules) didn't even campaign (for Christ's sake, his name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan) should be seated would hold a little more weight. You can't change horses in midstream though (unless you're Hillary Clinton talking about Iraq or Iran). Why does the fact that the DNC want a Democrat (even if, gasp, it's not Hillary Clinton) to get elected to the Presidency rankle so much with you Hillary supporters?

Those "BIG" donors for Obama? They're mostly people like me who sent him a couple hundred bucks. In fact, he has received the majority of his money from small net-roots donors. I don't recall having seen any pictures of him with Rupert Murdoch at $1000 per plate fund raisers lately (or ever for that matter) or hearing about him taking calls from Richard Mellon Scaife (the man, I may add, who tried like hell to torpedo her husband's Presidency). You think that Andrew is a traitor for upholding his beliefs and speaking his mind? I would say that the pot needs to realize that (s)he's just as black as the kettle.

In other words, "Sell crazy someplace else. We're all stocked up here!"

[cali]

105. whoa. I can see this has really upset you

but that re-post really doesn't address my OP. Mr.Andrews is not accusing Hillary Clinton of anything, let alone possessing nukes and poison gas. He has simply said he thinks Obama is the better candidate. Really, you need to get a grip.

[smiley_glad_hands]

86. You are on top of your game Cali, K&R eom.

[Leo 9]

89. Defection of longtime superdelegate jolts Clinton

Defection of longtime superdelegate jolts Clinton

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
32 minutes ago


SOUTH BEND, Ind. - Hillary Rodham Clinton was jolted Thursday by the defection of one of her longtime superdelegate supporters, a former national party chairman who urged fellow Democrats to "reject the old negative politics" and unify behind Barack Obama.

"A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue" a long, self-destructive Democratic campaign, Joe Andrew added in a letter designed to have an impact on the turbulent race nationally as well as in his home state of Indiana, site of a primary next week.

"A vote to continue this process is a vote that assists John McCain," Andrew wrote.

snip

In his letter, Andrew not only challenged Clinton's claims about electability, but he also bluntly denounced the type of campaign tactics practiced by some in the Clinton circle.

"If the campaign's surrogates called Governor Bill Richardson, a respected former member of President Clinton's cabinet, a "Judas" for endorsing Senator Obama, we can all imagine how they will treat somebody like me," he wrote.

snip

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080501/ap_on_el_pr/democrats

[ekwhite]

92. I read his letter on Huffpo

It was truly amazing. Here is one of my favorite sections from his letter.

We don't care about the size of your bank account, just the size of your heart; and we don't care where you are today, just where you dream you want to be tomorrow.

That is your Democratic Party.

That is Barack Obama's Democratic Party.

That is the Party that will win in November.

[caligirl]

100. funny, I called the DNC about the robocall scandel in NC and told Dean

that now with the NC attorney general investigating it would be good to bring this campaign to an end fast. No telling what will be exposed by the NC AG's investigation.

[D23MIURG23]

101. Its a sign of the inevitable.

This race is ending, albeit slowly. The Supers aren't interested in the electoral immolation they would produce by couping for Clinton, and they are going to realize that they don't want three and a half more months of hysterical fits from her campaign.

I'm thinking there will be a lot more of this comming, particularly if Obama wins Indiana.

[psychopomp]

104. Thanks for the heads-up and analysis

:toast:

[davidpdx]

107. Not surprisingly he's already been thrown under the bus

by the Clinton campaign. It will be interesting what else they come up with.